Robots in Society: Design, Functionality, and Ethical Challenges in Human-Robot Interaction
This academic conference paper provides a comprehensive and comparative overview of different types of robots, including social, educational, entertainment, industrial, collaborative, mobile, service, and humanoid robots. It examines how anthropomorphic design affects robot classification, emotional engagement, and societal acceptance across various domains such as healthcare, education, retail, and manufacturing. Furthermore, the study identifies important ethical challenges associated with human-robot interaction, such as risks of emotional manipulation, stereotype reinforcement, and psychological dependence.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
Researchers and developers seeking to understand the technical, functional, and ethical dimensions of human-robot interaction.
What the document contains
The paper covers technical classifications, functional applications, and socio-psychological dimensions of human-robot interaction across various robot categories. It addresses how anthropomorphic design, user trust, perceived agency, and emotional intelligence influence human acceptance of robotic systems.
The text does not provide binding legal regulations, governance frameworks, or enforcement mechanisms for robotic technologies.
- Robots are evolving into multifunctional, socially interactive systems that span multiple domains including healthcare, education, retail, and manufacturing.
- Anthropomorphic design increases user trust, engagement, and acceptance, but can also heighten perceptions of threat and reinforce stereotypes.
- Emotional ties between humans and robots raise ethical concerns regarding emotional deception, manipulation, and the authenticity of companionship.
- Successful robot integration depends on technical efficiency, context-aware design, and alignment with human social expectations.
· Introduction · Methodology · Results · Robots in different domains and technological integration · Social robots, anthropomorphism, and human-robot interaction · Humanoid, educational, and entertainment robots · Industrial, collaborative, and mobile robots · Embodiment and service robots · Conclusions
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
2/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
A growing body of literature questions how much control AI robots have. To assess how anthropomorphic design influences perceptions of robot agency, Pelau et al. (2024) adopted a scenario-based approach.
Embodiment and service robots
screening score · 2026-10-23
Fairness
2/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
Anthropomorphic features, like gendered voices, facial expressions, and socially stereotypical behaviours, can increase trust and engagement when they are in line with user expectations, according to Zhang et al. (2024) systematic review of 118 studies. However, in delicate service contexts like healthcare, overuse of anthropomorphism can also increase feelings of threat, strengthen stereotypes, and decrease acceptance.
Social robots, anthropomorphism, and human-robot interaction
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Dignity
2/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
The emotional companionship offered by robots, particularly disembodied agents, raises ethical concerns about authenticity, manipulation, and long-term social adaptation
Embodiment and service robots
screening score · 2026-10-23
Privacy
2/5Protection of personal data and private life
However, a lot of social home robots fail commercially despite high expectations because of unclear value statements, privacy concerns, and low consumer trust.
Social robots, anthropomorphism, and human-robot interaction
screening score · 2026-10-23
Transparency
0/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
None
screening score · 2026-10-23
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
None
screening score · 2026-10-23
Impact Assessment
0/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
None
screening score · 2026-10-23